Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

I was taught that these issues should be talked on the confessor level. Some priest I know tell they do not want to hear anything about marital sex at all during confessions.

I was suggesting that the OP discuss his or her overall views about sexuality and the Orthodox point of view with a priest, not in a confessional sense so as to learn the correct Orthodox teaching and be better able to understand the misconceptions which many Catholic posters have about our teachings. I would agree with what you said about confession and marital sexual issues - excepting I think for forced acts....most of those should be addressed in a counseling setting before confession and absolution.

Here's a question for our RC friend: If the primary purpose of marriage is procreation and doing otherwise is against God's will, then what of those who adopt rather than have biological children? (My grandparents on my father's side, for instance, who were both Catholics.) It is hard for me to see how the care of an otherwise neglected child as though it were your own could somehow be against God's will, as God Himself protects the orphan, and yet the couple in that situation did not preform the marital act to its "primary purpose" in creating the child.

And of course, there are all those Catholic adoption agencies...do they get a pass or what? I've never seen one with any sort of signage visible on it telling prospective parents to go home and make their own, in accordance with natural law.

Here's a question for our RC friend: If the primary purpose of marriage is procreation and doing otherwise is against God's will, then what of those who adopt rather than have biological children? (My grandparents on my father's side, for instance, who were both Catholics.) It is hard for me to see how the care of an otherwise neglected child as though it were your own could somehow be against God's will, as God Himself protects the orphan, and yet the couple in that situation did not preform the marital act to its "primary purpose" in creating the child.

And of course, there are all those Catholic adoption agencies...do they get a pass or what? I've never seen one with any sort of signage visible on it telling prospective parents to go home and make their own, in accordance with natural law.

And what of people beyond childbearing age or people who are sterile through no choice of their own? Why then does your church allow them to marry? (Of course, I remember, we had an endless back and forth last year with a few Orthos who thought this was bad and not Orthodox either....Erroneous understandings of the Church's views on sexuality are not limited to the walls of churches in union with the Pope of Rome....)

That wasn't a serious question. But I guess it's true that I don't see how making a man get erections after God has decided he shouldn't anymore is any less controlling reproduction than contraception is. It's just going in the other direction in that case.

But, anyway...I should be careful with my rhetorical questions, as I know already that the RCC has an answer for everything.

Is the RCC then going to pay for his Viagra? Or is that considered a form of "birth control"?

Nope. If the man's impotence would be helped by viagra, he could marry. At least according the CAR theological people.

What if he could be helped by viagra, but he chose not to use viagra. Could he be forced to use viagra?

Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

That wasn't a serious question. But I guess it's true that I don't see how making a man get erections after God has decided he shouldn't anymore is any less controlling reproduction than contraception is. It's just going in the other direction in that case.

But, anyway...I should be careful with my rhetorical questions, as I know already that the RCC has an answer for everything.

I would like to know a citation and or a credible source for this story - frankly, it sounds more like urban legend. What Diocese was this church and priest located within? It's one thing to disagree with our Roman brothers and sisters, but it is a far worse thing to spread false or incomplete stories. For all you know there may have been an impediment barring the wedding - even one which might have blocked the same in a canonical Orthodox parish.

That wasn't a serious question. But I guess it's true that I don't see how making a man get erections after God has decided he shouldn't anymore is any less controlling reproduction than contraception is. It's just going in the other direction in that case.

But, anyway...I should be careful with my rhetorical questions, as I know already that the RCC has an answer for everything.

I would like to know a citation and or a credible source for this story - frankly, it sounds more like urban legend. What Diocese was this church and priest located within? It's one thing to disagree with our Roman brothers and sisters, but it is a far worse thing to spread false or incomplete stories. For all you know there may have been an impediment barring the wedding - even one which might have blocked the same in a canonical Orthodox parish.

I'm as credible a source as it's getting for that story. His granddaughter told us. I don't know what diocese because I didn't ask, but no one seemed surprised when it was discussed and a few gave the same exact response that orthonorm gave- he could be married if he could be helped by Viagra. The reasoning being that consummating the marriage is a requirement for a marriage to be valid. What I was left wondering was- what about saints who were married but lived "as brother and sister"?

Here's a citation from the code of canon law:

Canon 1084.1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.

Well, I am a convert to Catholicism (from Atheism) and I must say that the reason I am on this board is because I am investigating Orthodoxy in light of my further reading, study, and comparison of pre- and post-Vatican II Catholicism.

In other words, the lack of consistency between the pre- and post-Conciliar Roman Catholic Church is astounding. Yet, this was not something that was apparent to me prior to my conversion 4.5 years ago... I don't know how many Catholics are coming around to investigating Orthodoxy as a result of the apparent dogmatic and liturgical discrepancies, though. Many retreat into "Traditional Catholicism" taking refuge at parishes with Tridentine Masses - a very small minority of Catholic parishes. And even then, the mere fact that the vast majority of the Roman Catholic Church appears to have abandoned the pre-Conciliar faith is a difficult situation to rationalize even for the most devout Roman Catholic. It is surely a struggle for me!

I am afraid your contribution in this topic has gotten lost in all the noise and hand wringing that accompany any time our bishop(s) have anything to do with Rome.I'm glad you're here nonetheless and hope your endeavors are fulfilling and fruitful.

Thank you. I am glad this thread took the turn it did because it has actually helped answer quite a few questions I have about Orthodoxy versus Roman Catholicism! I must say, although I tend toward legalistic thought (being a lawyer and all), I find myself in agreement with the Orthodox here who have pointed out the logical conclusion of legalism and scholasticism in terms of artificial birth control and the theology of marriage.

I'm glad someone mentioned NFP in connection with artificial birth control. Setting aside the possibility of the abortifacient qualities of artificial birth control, there is really no meaningful difference between NFP and artificial birth control in practice (assuming the intent of the couple is the same, namely the prevention of conception). I wonder, though, what is the Orthodox response when considering the possibility of spontaneous (albeit unintended) abortion with artificial birth control...?

Logged

"You must have an opinion on everything and loudly confront everyone with it." - Cyrillic

That wasn't a serious question. But I guess it's true that I don't see how making a man get erections after God has decided he shouldn't anymore is any less controlling reproduction than contraception is. It's just going in the other direction in that case.

But, anyway...I should be careful with my rhetorical questions, as I know already that the RCC has an answer for everything.

I would like to know a citation and or a credible source for this story - frankly, it sounds more like urban legend. What Diocese was this church and priest located within? It's one thing to disagree with our Roman brothers and sisters, but it is a far worse thing to spread false or incomplete stories. For all you know there may have been an impediment barring the wedding - even one which might have blocked the same in a canonical Orthodox parish.

I'm as credible a source as it's getting for that story. His granddaughter told us. I don't know what diocese because I didn't ask, but no one seemed surprised when it was discussed and a few gave the same exact response that orthonorm gave- he could be married if he could be helped by Viagra. The reasoning being that consummating the marriage is a requirement for a marriage to be valid. What I was left wondering was- what about saints who were married but lived "as brother and sister"?

Here's a citation from the code of canon law:

Canon 1084.1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.

I wonder if the pastor made an inquiry about this condition, or if the would be couple volunteered the same? I suspect that being of an older generation of catechized Catholics they volunteered this most personal information.

The fixation on matters pertaining to sex in the Roman Church, which has always perplexed me, is perhaps exacerbated by the tradition of forced clerical celibacy.

That wasn't a serious question. But I guess it's true that I don't see how making a man get erections after God has decided he shouldn't anymore is any less controlling reproduction than contraception is. It's just going in the other direction in that case.

But, anyway...I should be careful with my rhetorical questions, as I know already that the RCC has an answer for everything.

I would like to know a citation and or a credible source for this story - frankly, it sounds more like urban legend. What Diocese was this church and priest located within? It's one thing to disagree with our Roman brothers and sisters, but it is a far worse thing to spread false or incomplete stories. For all you know there may have been an impediment barring the wedding - even one which might have blocked the same in a canonical Orthodox parish.

I'm as credible a source as it's getting for that story. His granddaughter told us. I don't know what diocese because I didn't ask, but no one seemed surprised when it was discussed and a few gave the same exact response that orthonorm gave- he could be married if he could be helped by Viagra. The reasoning being that consummating the marriage is a requirement for a marriage to be valid. What I was left wondering was- what about saints who were married but lived "as brother and sister"?

Here's a citation from the code of canon law:

Canon 1084.1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.

I wonder if the pastor made an inquiry about this condition, or if the would be couple volunteered the same? I suspect that being of an older generation of catechized Catholics they volunteered this most personal information.

The fixation on matters pertaining to sex in the Roman Church, which has always perplexed me, is perhaps exacerbated by the tradition of forced clerical celibacy.

I suspect you are correct. I'm certainly don't mean to come across as accusing any pastor of malice. It just seemed tangentially related to the turn of the conversation and since it just came up very recently, the issue was fresh in my mind. I'm trying to be very vague, also, because as you say- it's highly personal.

That wasn't a serious question. But I guess it's true that I don't see how making a man get erections after God has decided he shouldn't anymore is any less controlling reproduction than contraception is. It's just going in the other direction in that case.

But, anyway...I should be careful with my rhetorical questions, as I know already that the RCC has an answer for everything.

I would like to know a citation and or a credible source for this story - frankly, it sounds more like urban legend. What Diocese was this church and priest located within? It's one thing to disagree with our Roman brothers and sisters, but it is a far worse thing to spread false or incomplete stories. For all you know there may have been an impediment barring the wedding - even one which might have blocked the same in a canonical Orthodox parish.

I'm as credible a source as it's getting for that story. His granddaughter told us. I don't know what diocese because I didn't ask, but no one seemed surprised when it was discussed and a few gave the same exact response that orthonorm gave- he could be married if he could be helped by Viagra. The reasoning being that consummating the marriage is a requirement for a marriage to be valid. What I was left wondering was- what about saints who were married but lived "as brother and sister"?

Here's a citation from the code of canon law:

Canon 1084.1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.

I wonder if the pastor made an inquiry about this condition, or if the would be couple volunteered the same? I suspect that being of an older generation of catechized Catholics they volunteered this most personal information.

The fixation on matters pertaining to sex in the Roman Church, which has always perplexed me, is perhaps exacerbated by the tradition of forced clerical celibacy.

I don't think this is quite fair. Human sexuality is a powerful gift given by God wherein we actually, like Him and with His cooperation, create new life. I have been equally disappointed with the rather, what I consider worldy, view of sex expressed here(sex for pleasure without being open to any unintended consequences.)

We see so much suffering in the world which can be directly related to Mankind's abuse of this awesome gift: broken families, abortion, pornography etc. The Church most certainly should and does have a lot to say in how it is used. It seems to me that God is not welcome in a lot of bedrooms

As for NFP, a couple refrains from the sex act rather then directly frustrating the end. I just don't see how ABC can be confused with NFP.

I found this link interesting in addressing my question regarding modern with traditional Orthodox teaching on ABC. It seems that for all the holding steadfast to everything else, the OC has waffled, and quite frankly, caved on this issue: http://www.hli.org/index.php/contraception/138?task=view

This thread has actually helped me quite a bit and I thank you all.

« Last Edit: September 22, 2012, 07:18:18 AM by #1Sinner »

Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.

I don't think this is quite fair. Human sexuality is a powerful gift given by God wherein we actually, like Him and with His cooperation, create new life. I have been equally disappointed with the rather, what I consider worldy, view of sex expressed here(sex for pleasure without being open to any unintended consequences.)

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

What the heck happened here!!! I was having this thread talking about the Patriarch attending Vatican II and it turns into some marriage argument!!!

Well, aren't Patriarchs prohibited from marrying?

Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

Here's a question for our RC friend: If the primary purpose of marriage is procreation and doing otherwise is against God's will, then what of those who adopt rather than have biological children? (My grandparents on my father's side, for instance, who were both Catholics.) It is hard for me to see how the care of an otherwise neglected child as though it were your own could somehow be against God's will, as God Himself protects the orphan, and yet the couple in that situation did not preform the marital act to its "primary purpose" in creating the child.

And of course, there are all those Catholic adoption agencies...do they get a pass or what? I've never seen one with any sort of signage visible on it telling prospective parents to go home and make their own, in accordance with natural law.

Let me be more explicit, then: If a couple married and adopted children but did not produce their own biological children, would their marriage be somehow deficient of defective due to not having fulfilled its primary purpose of producing new human beings?

Let me be more explicit, then: If a couple married and adopted children but did not produce their own biological children, would their marriage be somehow deficient of defective due to not having fulfilled its primary purpose of producing new human beings?

Each situation is different. If the couple only adopts children and aborts all of their own children, then it would be wrong. However, if the couple is unable to have any children due to some medical or biological problem then it would be praiseworthy for them to adopt children.

Let me be more explicit, then: If a couple married and adopted children but did not produce their own biological children, would their marriage be somehow deficient of defective due to not having fulfilled its primary purpose of producing new human beings?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

If the EP so desires, it would seem to me that sending someone to a commemoration ceremony is appropriate.

The EP, along with many other Orthodox jurisdictions, sent observers to Vatican II. Examples include Father Alexander Schmemann, Father Nicholas Afanasiev, and (as I recall) the MP's Director of External Affairs (Metropolian +HILARION's predecessor). Further, some Melkite Greek Catholics proudly assert that the Melkite church's interventions at the council for all intents and purposes represented the EP (https://melkite.org/faith/faith-worship/introduction). The general Melkite consensus regards the council as somewhat of a victory for "Byzantine" Christianity, in that the dialogue and final documents integrated perspectives from both the western patristic revival of the early 20th century, as well as perspectives from the Christian East, rather than solely post-Tridentine "scholastic" perspectives.

In fact, it's alleged that the very important Vatican II document Lumen Gentium has a very heavy stamp from Father Nicholas Afanasiev (RO Western Europe Exarcahte), in particular how it integrates his work on ecclesiology. The intro to the translation of his "Church of the Holy Spirit" -his look at pre-nicene ecclesiology and the role of the laity through the bishop in the church of the time - states that the Acta of the Council references him as a key contributor.

Logged

O Lord although I desired to blot outwith my tears the handwriting of my many sinsAnd for the rest of my life to please Thee through sincere repentanceYet doth the enemy lead me astray as he wareth against my sould with his cunning